Mr.Intel's Journal: Gun Control

This story has proven to be the most active one on slashdot for quite a while, and understandably so. This issue has been on the minds of Americans since the 1934 Federal firearms act and remains one of the fundamental conflicts in America today. Perhaps aside from abortion, the single biggest legal issue in America.

In studying for my final in American National Government I came across this quote: "Federal firearms regulations did not come into being until Prohibition. In 1939, however, a unanimous Court upheld a 1934 federal law requiring the taxation and registration of machine guns and sawed off shotguns. The Court held the the Second Amendment protects a citizen's right to own a ordinary militia weapons; sawed-off shotguns did not qualify for protection."

From the decision itself, "In the absence of [the presentation of] any evidence tending to show that possession of or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within the judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense." - (U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174, 1939) (Reference) Note that Miller died before the case was heard in the court, so a defense was not given to the Justices.

Some of the arguments put forth in the thread here in the slashdot debate are as follows:

Pro gun control
- Guns are dangerous and therefore should not be in the hands of regular citizens.
- The 2nd Amendment clearly states that guns are for militia, not everyone.
- Crime increases when the average citizen has access to guns.

Against gun control
- Guns are necessary to protect the people from tyranny.
- The 2nd Amendment clearly states that guns are for every citizen.
- Crime increases when you restrict citizen access to guns because criminals will acquire them anyway.

In my class this year, it has been pointed out that this is a classic case of freedom versus order. The freedom to bear arms versus the social order that the governmental regulation of firearms would bring. As with all fundamental issues like this, it has hotly divided the American people who fit two general molds. Those who value freedom more than order and those who value order more than freedom.

Personally, I value freedom more than order because I feel that order will come from freedom if those who bear the freedom make good choices. To force any standard on a people can only lead them into captivity regardless of the intent. Granted this would be a bit idealistic to apply to the real world and basic laws are therefore required. However, governmental regulation of a people has never sustained that people for a long period of time. On the contrary, all great civilizations that have imposed their will onto their people have failed and it was for that very reason.